VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent at £900 PCM for Assured Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided that the rent for an assured periodic tenancy should be set at £900 per month, starting from April 2025. The decision was made based on the tribunal's own knowledge and experience since no evidence of comparable rents was provided by either party.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair determination of their rent under section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 if they challenge a proposed increase.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent assessment

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the open-market rent based on its knowledge and experience, considering factors such as the periods of the tenancy and the terms of the agreement.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on its own knowledge and experience, setting it at £900 pcm from April 2025.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured periodic tenancy to be £900 per calendar month, effective from April 2025. The decision was based on the tribunal's knowledge and experience as no evidence of comparable rents was provided by either party.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. BIR/00CU/MNR/2025/0621

Notice of the Tribunal Decision and Register of Rents under Assured Periodic Tenancies (Section 14 Determination)

Housing Act 1988 Section 14

Address of Premises The Tribunal members were 10 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] B.Sc.(Est.Man.) FRICS Judge D R Salter

Landlord c/o [RESPONDENT] & Co. [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 900 Per calendar month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 1 April 2025

3. The amount included for services is not applicable N/A Per N/A

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 1 February 2023 5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly 6. Allocation of liability for repairs Section 11 Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Unfurnished. 8. Description of premises Three bedroom semi-detached house.

[NAME] B.Sc.(Est.Man.) FRICS Date of Decision 14 January 2026

1

Case Reference : BIR/00CU/MNR/2025/0621

Property

: 10 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Applicant: [redacted]

Respondent: [redacted] : Appeal against a Notice proposing a new rent under an

Assured Periodic Tenancy under section 13(4) of the Housing

Act 1988

Tribunal Members : [NAME] B.Sc.(Est.Man.) FRICS

Judge David R. Salter

Date and Venue of : None. Decided on papers Hearing

Date of Decision : 14 January 2026

Date of Issue

: 11 June 2026 ____________________________________________________________

REASONS FOR DECISION

____________________________________________________________

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2026

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

1 The market rent is determined at £900.00 (Nine Hundred Pounds) per calendar month from 1 April 2025.

REASONS

Introduction

2 The tenant, [APPELLANT], holds a monthly assured tenancy of 10 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] which is a three bedroom semi-detached house. The Tenancy Agreement commenced on 1 February 2023.

3 On 4 February 2025 the landlord served notice of increase under section 13(2) of The Housing Act 1988 proposing a rent increase from £800 pcm to £900 pcm to take effect on 1 April 2025. The rent did not include any Council Tax, water rates or service charges.

4 On 26 February 2025 the tenant applied for the rent to be determined by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).

5 The Tribunal has considered the case based on its own knowledge, experience and online research as neither party had submitted evidence of rents paid for comparable properties. Neither party requested a hearing.

The Law

6 Section 14 of The Housing Act 1988 provides:

'(1) Where, under subsection (4)(a) of section 13 above, a tenant refers to a rent assessment committee a notice under subsection (2) of that section, the committee shall determine the rent at which, subject to subsections (2) and (4) below, the committee consider that the dwelling-house concerned might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy -

(a) which is a periodic tenancy having the same periods as those of the tenancy to

which the notice relates;

(b) which begins at the beginning of the new period specified in the notice;

(c) the terms of which (other than relating to the amount of the rent) are the same as

those of the tenancy to which the notice relates;...'

'(2) In making a determination under this section, there shall be disregarded -

(a) any effect on the rent attributable to the granting of a tenancy to a sitting tenant;

(b) any increase in the value of the dwelling-house attributable to a relevant

improvement carried out by a person who at the time it was carried out was the

tenant, if the improvement-

(i) was carried out otherwise than in pursuance of an obligation to the

immediate landlord ...'

Facts Found

7 The Tribunal has not inspected the property and relies upon the limited evidence relating to the property provided by the parties and online research.

3

8 The property is a three bedroom, semi-detached house in a residential area near Junction 10 of the M6, to the east of Wolverhampton.

9 It was let unfurnished and there are no services provided with the tenancy.

Evidence

10 The Tenant's Submission

In a covering email to the Tribunal sent with the Application, the Tenant said the condition of the house did not justify a rent increase but did not identify any specific items to support this view. He referred to 'a number of faults and defects' which he said had not been rectified but there was no more detailed description or any photographs of the property showing the alleged defects.

11 The Landlord's Submission

The Landlord made no Submissions.

Decision

12 Although the parties had provided no substantive evidence of market rents for this type of property, the Tribunal finds from its own knowledge and experience that the market rent would be around £900 pcm. We are unable to make any allowance for condition without evidence.

13 Accordingly, the Tribunal determines the rent under section 14 of The Housing Act 1988

at £900.00 (Nine Hundred pounds) pcm with effect from 1 April 2025.

[NAME] B.Sc.(Est.Man.) FRICS

Chairman

Appeal

If either party is dissatisfied with this decision an application may be made to the Upper Tribunal, Property Chamber (Residential Property) on a point of law arising from this Decision only. Prior to making such an appeal, an application must be made, in writing, to the Tribunal for permission to appeal. Any such application must be received within 28 days of the issue of this statement of reasons (regulation 52(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013) stating the grounds on which it is intended to rely in the appeal.

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • The tribunal determined the market rent to be £900 per calendar month.
  • The tribunal relied on its own knowledge, experience, and online research to determine the market rent.
  • The new rent takes effect from 1 April 2025.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The tenant's general claim about the house's condition not justifying a rent increase was not supported by specific evidence.
  • The landlord did not submit any arguments or evidence to the tribunal.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The rent for an assured periodic tenancy was set at £900 per month, effective from April 2025.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord were involved in the dispute over rent increase.

How did the court decide, and why?

The tribunal decided based on its own knowledge and experience since no evidence of comparable rents was provided by either party.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 was applied to determine the rent.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The lack of evidence from both parties regarding comparable rents influenced the decision.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was in favour of the tenant, setting a fair market rent based on tribunal's assessment.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone challenging a proposed rent increase should provide evidence of comparable rents to support their case.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence showing comparable rental prices would have been beneficial but was not provided by either party.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, an appeal can be made on a point of law to the Upper Tribunal within 28 days.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.

Official source: First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.